Enlightenhttp://www.enlighten.com
Integrated Digital Marketing AgencyMon, 23 Feb 2015 16:16:40 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.5What Makes a Good (Brand) Story?http://www.enlighten.com/2015/02/what-makes-a-good-brand-story/
http://www.enlighten.com/2015/02/what-makes-a-good-brand-story/#commentsMon, 23 Feb 2015 16:16:40 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=3095What makes a good story? Is it a dynamic hero, or a surprising plot? Credible conflict, or a fascinating theme? It’s hard to imagine that anything but divine intervention could be responsible for a hugely popular novel or film, and harder still to quantify the level of adoration that meets some YouTube video, blog posts, and Vines.

In recent years, we’ve seen the digital marketing industry embrace the term “storytelling” and use it to describe virtually any piece of branded content that emerges online. NewsCred has predicted that, “Existing marketing silos will fall apart as content, data and technology emerge as the only way for brands to reach consumers through storytelling.” With publishers like The New York Times, Huffington Post, The Guardian, and Condé Nast investing in branded content studios that produce sponsored posts and native ads, there’s pressure on this strategy to deliver.

In theory, it should. Stories have the power to evoke an emotional response that, in marketing, can result in brand affinity and loyalty. For this reason, marketers are taking a closer look at storytelling in an effort to understand its nuances and craft better content.

There’s no secret formula for success. But there are a few guidelines that, when followed, can pilot virtually any story into consumers’ hearts.

Every brand story needs conflict. Think of conflict as the thing that keeps audiences perched on the edge of their seats. Conflict is the problem that your hero has to overcome, and the tension that keeps the narrative moving forward. In Jack Daniel’s Bar Stories, a collection of short stories and videos amassed from bars across the country, the conflict takes many forms: a bartender who’s asked by two female customers to keep a strange secret, the appearance of an African lion in a pub in Iowa. Conflict can be bizarre or true-to-life, fiction or non-fiction, as long as it has audiences wondering what will happen next.

Make a hero of your customer. Brand stories might be designed to create a positive perception of your brand, but make your company or product the hero and you’ll come off looking self-absorbed. Instead, take a cue from London’s John Lewis and its #MontyThePenguin holiday video. In it, a little boy becomes a hero to his stuffed penguin and imaginary friend when he gives it a companion – purchased at a John Lewis store – for Christmas. Little wonder that the video has racked up more than 22 million YouTube views.

A story has to make you care. This missive comes courtesy of Andrew Stanton, filmmaker and writer of every “Toy Story” movie along with WALL-E” and “Finding Nemo.” In his TED Talk on storytelling, Stanton implies that every storyteller should strive to make viewers connect with the message and become invested in the outcome, such that they can’t turn away. Storytelling is about “wonder,” he says. When a story generates that in a meaningful way, audiences can’t help but care.

As with any marketing tactic, your ability to produce something effective is directly tied to your grasp of the medium. To write a brand story that entertains and persuades, give it the characteristics that have proven so successful for books and movies. Consumers will take it from there.

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2015/02/what-makes-a-good-brand-story/feed/0Social Media as a News Outlet: Reported.lyhttp://www.enlighten.com/2014/12/social-media-as-a-news-outlet-reported-ly/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/12/social-media-as-a-news-outlet-reported-ly/#commentsWed, 17 Dec 2014 15:38:54 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=3056If Will McAvoy taught us anything during those three powerful seasons of The Newsroom, it’s that verified facts and details outweigh the race to be first in breaking a story.

Social Media is seen as the enemy throughout the series, and they make a good argument as to why my profession can destroy the truth, and lives (let’s not forget the wrongful accusing in the Boston bombing suspects).

So when the world renown and respected NPR Senior Strategist Andy Carvin decided to create a different spin on how social media cannot just change, but enhance the way we receive and interact with the news, my Journalism Degree and Social Media career made their relationship Facebook Official.

“Not a newswire, but a crowdsourced newsroom of public editors.”

Carvin is calling it Reported.ly, which will feature stories from global “anchors” Carvin has hand selected to represent the venture. The idea is to have his journalists based around the world to deliver breaking news through social media.

At first glance, it’s nothing we haven’t heard before. BuzzFeed has made a name for itself by repurposing news stories as they become trending. (Although if I’m asked to take one more quiz to see which TV show character I’m most similar to I’m going to lose it.)

But then I did some more digging and realized that this really is something we should all take notice of. The goal for Reportedly is not to be the first to break the news, it’s to break through the noise and strike up a real-time conversation with social media users to enlighten, and educate, about what’s happening in the world that interests them. And to find out exactly what those interests are, and how Reportedly should be executed overall, Carvin and his team have already taken to Twitter (#AskReportedly) and Reddit.

One of the major red flags that went off in my head seemed to be a general worry for many people: sources.

How will sources be identified and verified when social media is all about anonymity?

Carvin referenced Boston when he answered this inquiry on Reddit:

“We want to highlight the people behind the stories and ideas, not exploit them.

As for Boston, one of my reasons for wanting to create this subreddit is how that event played out on reddit. I’m wrapping up a research project for Columbia U’s journalism school in which I analyzed several thousand tweets from multiple reddit threads in which they tried to ID the bombers. Two important findings: while there were a lot of sincere people trying to help, I couldn’t find a single person who appeared to be a journalist. Second, almost no one raised questions about sourcing and confirmation methods. There were a surprising number of people warning how their methods might backfire, but there wasn’t a facilitated discuss on how you can use reddit in a more constructed and ethical way. As we plan to staff this subreddit with our team, we hope to help change that.”

Clearly, Carvin has done his research, but I couldn’t say I was convinced yet. I wanted to know something else: What about mistakes? Any social media professional can tell you when dealing with real-time updates, it’s easy to get trigger-happy and post something without making sure you’re right on the money. So what then?

That’s right. He’s asking the public to call him out on his mistakes. Which may sound strange, but the last time Carvin slipped up, he not only admitted it right away, he made sure to apologize and repeatedly Tweet the correction. A move like that might be frowned upon in traditional journalism, but in the fast-paced world of social media, it builds trust. And I have to say, after days of trying to poke holes in Reportedly, I can’t see any reason why we shouldn’t give Carvin and his talented team of journalists a chance to change the way the world consumes it’s news.

Last month, I had the opportunity to attend a direct response marketing conference with a friend of mine who’s been in the business for decades. Direct response’s endgame is to create just that – a “direct response” from the consumer, such as a phone call to a toll-free number, click to visit a website, etc. Surprisingly, at the conference I attended, which was called “Titans of Direct Response” (humble title, I know), direct mail (through the post) remains the preferred channel for reaching consumers by this group of marketing professionals.

STOP! DON’T RUN AND HIDE.

Most of us would probably consider direct mail at the bottom of the “marketing totem pole” (or maybe not even on the totem pole) when it comes to offering us a satisfying user experience. But direct response tactics via mail have worked in the past, and I think there are still useful takeaways that apply to the digital space. Here are a few:

1.) Direct response and direct mail are still around, and are still effective.

You’re probably thinking…who out there ever opens any kind of spam mail anymore, let alone has the patience to read it and actually purchase what it’s advertising? Speakers at the Titans conference revealed numbers indicating that although companies see high conversion rates in each of the major markets (New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle, Dallas, etc.), a large majority of the direct response customer base comes from concentrations in the Midwest, the Southwest, and the Plains states (Nebraska, Oklahoma, Iowa, Kansas, etc.). Most of these high conversion rates are attributed to an older demographic (consumers that grew up ordering via direct mail and infomercials) and lack technical knowledge. Also prominent are regional groups (small town, isolated areas) that have limited access to multiple tech channels for online shopping. Thought-provoking, right? There’s plenty more where that came from, if you’re interested. (See CMO Council for more Direct Marketing facts)

3.) These days, consumers are actually more informed, making them smarter and more selective than ever.

Several of the keynote speakers at the Titans conference referenced the idea of “consumer sophistication.” This concept, as you can probably guess, is evidence of the ever-growing intelligence of the average American consumer due to the explosion of information across the Internet. The more channels they have access to, the more they know, and they research products before they buy. Craig Davis, Chief Creative Officer at J. Walter Thompson, recently discussed the evolution of consumers with HubSpot saying, “Audiences everywhere are tough. They don’t have time to be bored or brow beaten by orthodox, old-fashioned advertising. We need to stop interrupting what people are interested in and be what people are interested in.” This is not to say that consumers who participate in direct response aren’t sophisticated – as mentioned earlier, it’s the demographic factor.

4.) Direct response is inextricably linked to big data.

If you haven’t yet identified the trend here, I’m trying to say that although it’s easy to simply dismiss the old ways of direct response, it still has a place in the world of marketing and advertising. Most of us can agree that direct mail isn’t exactly “cutting edge” anymore, but what can’t be overlooked is the emphasis direct response places on measurable data. In its hey-day, direct response was at the forefront of taking response data from customers and focusing efforts based on that data (hence the name “direct response” marketing). Today, companies such as Netflix rely heavily on data and use it to structure their business models (see Harsha Hegde’s take in this LinkedIn post).

5.) What does this mean for the future?

The Internet has fundamentally changed the way we research and consume products. As with all things, the Internet has evolved with age and it continues to change not only by the day, but by the hour it seems. Veteran direct response consultant Dan Kennedy (not to be confused with Enlighten’s very own Dan Kennedy) acknowledged during his presentation at the Titans conference that the Internet has posed new obstacles for traditional marketing tactics like that of direct response. Although traditional marketing methods continue to prosper today, there is no denying, even among direct response heavyweights, that the landscape is shifting.

This blog post is in no way supposed to serve as some grandiose report on the “state of marketing;” however these numbers were shocking to me, as I consider direct marketing to be outdated. The insight I gained was a reminder to me that it’s important to know about the other realms of marketing and how they are affecting our own.

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2014/11/who-opens-direct-mail-anymore-surprise-plenty-of-people/feed/0THE AUDACITY OF CODE | A TEDx DETROIT EXPERIENCEhttp://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/the-audacity-of-code-a-tedx-detroit-experience/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/the-audacity-of-code-a-tedx-detroit-experience/#commentsMon, 20 Oct 2014 15:08:43 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=3032On my way to attend TEDx Detroit, I noticed my tire pressure-warning lamp was illuminated. So I pulled into the service station, located the air compressor and positioned my vehicle. Quarters. I need quarters. No quarters in the change tray, under the seat, or anywhere they’re ‘supposed’ to be (I did find my old Fugazi CD next to a half eaten apple from one of my kids). But then, out of the corner of my eye, I noticed the VISA® logo on the air compressor, some extra buttons and an LCD display. It was amazing. Not only did I swipe my debit card, but this beautiful compressed air-delivering robot asked me to input the exact PSI I wanted to pump into my tire! And it automatically stopped pumping and emitted an auditory signal (probably in the key of C) that the tire was full. I thought to myself, “What a charmed, 21st-Century, suburban life I live,” as I drove away.

I was a bit late to TEDx Detroit and after taking in the immense, ornate beauty of the Detroit Opera House, I found a seat just as Brian Mulloy of Apigee took the stage. As he began his talk, the irony (that only I could detect) was almost too much for me to comprehend. Because Brian began his talk with a similar story of pulling into a service station to fill a smooshy tire. Except, in his story, Brian very colorfully imagined a hypothetical, ‘internet of things” scenario where the vehicle not only alerted him that his tire pressure was low, but directed him to a service station where the air compressor and his vehicle would instantly communicate, trading data enabling the compressor to know exactly what PSI to pump. In addition, through the alchemy of open API code, Brian would drive away not having needed to swipe his credit card, because PayPal would have been part of the data exchange as well. And to think I was so impressed with my tire inflation experience just an hour prior.

Wait a second. I WAS impressed with my tire inflation experience that morning. It felt like the next logical step in the iteration of the storied, 100+ year evolution of the massively important (tongue planted firmly in cheek) service station tire inflation experience. So, one big question came to mind – with a finite number of skilled tech developers and thinkers in our Country (discounting the ongoing debate around whether there’s a real developer shortage), and an infinite number of important challenges to solve, why are any of us applying that precious energy on imagining leaps in filling your car tire? This doesn’t mean that I believe Brian misdirects his talents. I repeat, Brian very adeptly shared a simple example of how the ‘internet of things’ and open APIs will continue to affect the mundane nooks of our daily lives. It was a fair, well-presented example. But, as an industry (and a generation) that has the coding power to steer this next phase of the digital revolution, my experience that morning made me question our priorities (as I often do, I’m revealing some of my skepticism around the intentions and mission of Silicon Valley and other digital “mavens,” which is an entirely separate rant. But in the meantime, read “Who Owns the Future” by Jaron Lanier if you feel even a shred of similar skepticism). In other words, some innovative iteration is only worthy of baby steps, in my opinion. Especially when it comes to putting air in your vehicle’s tires. In that case, baby steps for the baby steps! Yeah, yeah – I know. Even something as mundane as filling your tire could give a service station Brand a competitive edge, increasing their profitability and thus creating more jobs. And to that I say, Capitalism can sometimes have a way of making technology a navel-gazing, shortsighted proposition. Often times audaciously believing that writing the code is for our own good. Not to sound like an old, crotchety man, but the words my Dad spoke to me when he let me drive his Corvette for the first time seem relevant here: “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.” Save the talent and imagining for a myriad of more important things. Say, creating disruptive innovation in educating our kids? All of that rushed through my mind as I joined the well-deserved applause while Brian exited the stage.

Then Nate Aschenbach & David Arditti of GameStart took the stage. And with one concept, they brought me full circle and reminded me why I believe so strongly in basing any and all of our thinking on real, anthropological, human insights. They said, “We are the only animals on Earth that separate learning and play.” Boom. A real, truthful reason to passionately apply time, energy and talent into innovation. A tiger cub learns to hunt through tussling with its siblings. A young sparrow learns to evade larger birds of prey through playful acrobatic antics with other sparrows. Yet, in schools and in homes, we generally draw a hard line between when it’s time to “learn” and when it’s time to “play.” With that simple, truthful insight they’ve created an experience where kids literally play-to-learn, applying this simple philosophy to Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Math. And I suppose another layer of irony began to emerge in my mind – they’re teaching kids as young as 6-7 years old how to code.

This all left me with more questions. Namely, who will teach the next generation of developers and thinkers that the “audacity of code” can be used for short-sighted, quick wins, or it can be based on real human insights to solve long-term challenges? Whether you’re a Designer, a Copywriter (that’s me!) or a Developer – if you’re part of the ongoing digital revolution, I believe it starts with us. Right now. As my 9-year old continues to experiment with Python, I’m fairly certain there will come a time when I will echo the words my Dad spoke to me before handing me the keys to a 200 H.P. machine – “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.”

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/the-audacity-of-code-a-tedx-detroit-experience/feed/0Siri Can’t Defend Herself Against Androidhttp://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/siri-cant-defend-herself-against-android/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/siri-cant-defend-herself-against-android/#commentsSun, 05 Oct 2014 16:58:27 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=2999Like many of my fellow tech nerds, I took a long lunch break last month to watch the unveiling of the new iPhone. Not including the frustration of a livestream that even the White House could execute more properly, I wasn’t impressed by the new “features” Apple was flaunting in their new smart phone. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been a strong supporter of the late Steve Jobs and all his goodies ever since my first iPod color in the early 2000′s, but the innovation seems to be lacking now-a-days.

Samsung has always been the first to jump at jabbing new Apple products with snarky ads– one of my favorites being their reaction after word spread the 6 Plus was bending in pockets:

The Galaxy does seem to have more options to customize your phone, and the whole waterproof function on their Active model is brilliant. As an avid kayaker, this is life changing. Why didn’t Apple come out with a water-resistant model!? But I digress.

What I’m trying to say is, I’m still trying to figure out my next phone: Galaxy or iPhone? I turned to Siri on Friday night to help me decide.

Hmm… Okay. Let’s try that again.

A likely story, but I need some good reasoning before I drop a few hundred bucks.

Wait, really?

Fair. Maybe I should check in on Siri every so often to see how her day is going. Make sure her mental health is in order and she isn’t dealing with any loser robot boys. Girl talk, you understand.

Well isn’t that humble. But I’m still hoping for some sound advice about this Android situation.

Awww that’s sweet. But don’t avoid the subject by kissing up. I asked you a question, woman! What can you offer me?!

Ah. Well, I guess that’s that then. It’s been a real hoot, Siri.

Samsung, here I come.

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/siri-cant-defend-herself-against-android/feed/0I’ve Got 99 Problems and Privacy Is Onehttp://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/ive-got-99-problems-and-privacy-is-one/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/ive-got-99-problems-and-privacy-is-one/#commentsFri, 03 Oct 2014 17:45:12 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=2986Privacy breaches in online security are growing exponentially, and all I can say is, “I’ve got 99 problems, and privacy is one.” It’s an issue we’re slowly being forced to worry about. Whether it deals with stealing your identity or the personal content on your mobile device, lack of privacy is a problem many are currently experiencing. Due to all of the recent hacking/invasion of privacy incidents, some wonder if privacy will slowly become obsolete in the future. While that may not quite be the case, it’s something to think about.

Is Privacy a Problem?

There have been a variety of situations that have recently occurred, forcing the argument of whether or not privacy is a problem or not. These situations include everything from the Heartbleed Bug to the leaks of intimate celebrity photos.

The most recent incident involves Apple putting U2’s new album, “Songs of Innocence”, into everyone’s iPhone (go ahead and check your music library). This PR attempt failed miserably and has forced Apple to issue official instructions on how to remove the album. Now, whether you love or hate Bono is irrelevant. The fact that Apple placed music in your mobile device without permission is a definite indicator that invasion of privacy could be getting out of hand.

Food for Thought

You may be reading this and thinking, “Big deal, I got a free album,”- but did you just get a free album? Or was your privacy violated? Apple just put a product in your phone without asking your permission – so what else might they be able to access without your knowledge? Bet you didn’t think about that one. If you did, we had a similar thought process, and you are highly intelligent. Nonetheless, invasion of privacy is very real and it’s something that you may want to be aware of!

What You Can Do

Although it may seem overwhelming, there are pre-cautionary steps you can take to limit your privacy risk. In all of the social sites/applications that you use, always check the privacy settings to ensure that your information is being shared only with the people you want.

The #1 rule: Always be conscious of what you share. If you are worried about sharing something, don’t share it. Too often, people worry about sharing something, post it anyway, and then end up regretting it.

When it comes to intimate photos and sharing, think of it as being given to everyone to see. That isn’t necessarily the case, but it can potentially spread further than you had intended. Although you may take every possible step in being private, be mindful that there is always a chance of your information being leaked. Keep yourself protected – don’t let privacy become one of your problems.

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2014/10/ive-got-99-problems-and-privacy-is-one/feed/0Wireframes: Friend or Foe?http://www.enlighten.com/2014/09/wireframes-friend-or-foe/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/09/wireframes-friend-or-foe/#commentsWed, 17 Sep 2014 18:52:05 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=2975It seems like designers fall into two camps — either they think wireframes are really important OR they say they think wireframes are really important but don’t. At all. In fact, it has been my experience that those who fall into the latter group actually think that following the wireframes too closely makes them look lazy or non-innovative — that they are just coloring them in without actually doing any designing at all.

How I think these designers view wireframes:

As stated by Dan Brown in his 2007 book Communicating Design wireframes are, “A simplified view of what content will appear on each screen of the final product, usually devoid of color, typographical styles, and images.” In this broad view, wireframes are essentially any design rendering that does not highlight the look and feel. Instead, things such as overall site architecture and content layout, labels for navigation and basic functionality are often the focus. They can be rendered as sketches or drawings, created in a wireframing software program such as Axure, or even as clickable prototypes.

At their best, wireframes represent the upfront work done to ensure what is being built, who it’s being built for, and how best to build it for those users. They are a culmination of stakeholder goals, user needs, engineering capability, timeline and budget considerations, and (of course) usability best practices. If done the right way, wireframes are researched, created, vetted, tested, and edited (repeat as necessary). Yes, it is typically the UX designer who pulls together the renderings, but the process is hardly a one-person job. Virtually everyone (or representatives for everyone) on the project team needs to be involved during this process to make sure that the wireframes represent a well thought out and feasible design.

Despite the fact that it is widely agreed that wireframes are flexible in definition, representative of up-front work, and subject to change, there still seems to be some question of how useful wireframes are during the design process…

Of course, most of us realize that one solution can’t solve all problems and one person’s opinion is rarely all encompassing. However, since wireframes have entered into the processes of virtually all digital teams, it is worth taking a look at these questions: how useful are wireframes? How much should they be followed? How do we get the team (including designers) to invest in the work they represent?

Are They Useful?

Yes. Next quest… ok, I’ll elaborate.

Wireframes in and of themselves are not an outcome. They are representative of an outcome. They are an artifact – a way to communicate the work that has been done up to this point. Without some way of documenting how all of this up front work has influenced the design, it would be all too easy to completely forget how this work impacted the direction of the project.

Given that the wireframes are simply an artifact, it is reasonable then that the form and complexity that artifact takes might vary to meet the needs of a project or team. It’s possible that for a larger redesign project, it might make sense to create formal wireframes that can be archived, edited and shared, in order to keep track of all of the design decisions. However, for a smaller one-page refresh, a rough pencil sketch may be enough to get the designer started (if the developer cannot be involved during this process, I recommend annotating the comps to ensure functionality decisions are not lost). Or, perhaps for a new product design a prototype would help to visualize new functionality and support user testing.

No matter what decision is made, it is important not to resort to a default action. This can cause confusion, the loss of key decisions, or simply waste time.

How concrete are they?

How concrete is any deliverable? Ok, some are pretty concrete. Wireframes, though, are absolutely subject to change — just hopefully not with the wind. As stated before, wireframes represent a lot of up-front strategic work – research, analytics, business decisions, technical constraints, etc. So if a major functionality change is proposed in design, there should be a really good reason for it. That isn’t to say that really good reasons don’t come up, but the person proposing this change should be aware of (or find out) the implications to the project and be prepared to explain why the change is worth any setback it may incur before just popping the change into the comps.

Is that too much to ask? Sometimes it is, especially when a designer is on a really tight timeline and has to make some quick decisions at 2 AM in order to make something work for a comp review at 9 AM that morning. That’s where I find collaboration can be a really handy way to make sure everyone is on the same page early on. Get the designer involved during wireframing so that when they do need to make those decisions in a silo, they won’t ignore those good reasons why a decision was made (or can’t even if they sometimes really want to…a lot).

Of course, not all design limitations (or tech constraints for that matter) can be assessed during the wireframe review, so things will still come up later. But we can try, can’t we? Let’s try.

Does anyone care?

Somebody cares, right? I mean, I have a job so that says something right there. But when wireframes are seemingly ignored it can feel as though wireframes are built for the benefit of no one (well, I do like playing with Axure. I feel like I’m coding without that pesky ‘learning how to code’ nonsense).

People care. They really do. However, a lack of understanding of what they are or should be looking at can have a profound impact on how engaged people are when looking at a wireframe. This is another argument for why it’s important to take a look at the form the wireframes are taking, per the people and project involved.

One thing we’ve recently begun to explore are the idea of wireflows – wireframes arranged into a user flow or site map.

Wireflow example:

Team members (or clients) who may be getting too granular when looking at wireframes, can benefit from being able to see how the pages, transitions and interactions play into the larger whole. Communicating design clearly will increase people’s willingness to engage and provide meaningful feedback. Of course, no one can make someone care about their job (or yours) if they don’t. But hopefully that is a rare problem. And if it isn’t, well, that is an entirely different post for a different day.

Just remember, when wireframing a design: Choose form wisely, communicate purpose clearly, and collaborate with your team.

Ah, the hamburger menu icon – the UI element so ubiquitous it’s nicknamed after America’s favorite sandwich. We’ve seen it everywhere from Facebook’s mobile interface to the desktop version of the New York Times. Like any design pattern, the hamburger has been subject to its fair share of feedback – both good and bad. Is it the perfect design solution, or poison to user interaction? Let’s dive into the debate.

That’s right – the hamburger is pure old-school. However, we owe our modern rendition of the menu icon to a much smaller device: the mobile phone. Because the hamburger button addresses the space constraints of mobile design, it has become mainstream in apps and mobile-optimized websites – and it seems everyonehasanopinion on its effectiveness.

The Good

On the pro side of the discussion, there’s the obvious: the hamburger button frees up valuable space. It ensures that menu items continue to be available in a responsive design – which is particularly important in mobile and app development. “Google design patterns for Android currently recommend a (modified) hamburger icon for the Android navigation drawer, and as users experience this paradigm more, I expect it to become a standard part of the interface,” says Mike Behnke, world-class software engineer and hamburger proponent at Enlighten. When users doesn’t have to worry about a navigation bar, they can focus primarily on poignant content in both mobile and desktop environments.

The Bad

On the flip side of the patty, there’s the reduction in user interaction. Some usability experts are concerned that users may not know what the icon represents, and that they therefore won’t even tap or click it. If they never take that first step, they’ll lose access to the site navigation likely miss important content. Others argue that by requiring the user to tap open a side menu, you’re increasing the number of taps a user has to make, especially if they frequently need to navigate to other sections of the site. More taps = more opportunities for someone to leave your website before they’ve seen what you want them to see.

The Conclusions

Surprisingly, given all of the opinions floating around, not much hard data exists to either support or discredit the use of the hamburger menu icon. A couple of limited studies and A/B tests, in combination with the fact that even Facebook has thrown it away, aren’t enough to definitively resolve the debate.

Sebastian Ferrari, Enlighten user experience extraordinaire and our resident hamburger menu expert, believes that there’s still a time and place for the hamburger (outside of your Labor Day barbeque). “Everything depends on the context,” he says. “Consider the particular audience you might be targeting, and what your goals are – it could be that you want to encourage users to explore and discover different features and not reveal everything at once.”

Usability debates aside, the icon hamburger button probably isn’t going away anytime soon – so it’s likely that usage of the hamburger button and the expectations for its functionality will evolve over time. And remember, part of the excitement of designing for digital is that change is inevitable and relentless. Today’s hamburger icon could be tomorrow’s floppy-disk save icon.

]]>http://www.enlighten.com/2014/08/who-wants-a-hamburger-the-debate-over-the-hamburger-menu/feed/0How to Clean Up Your Social Networks for Employershttp://www.enlighten.com/2014/07/how-to-clean-up-your-social-networks-for-employers/
http://www.enlighten.com/2014/07/how-to-clean-up-your-social-networks-for-employers/#commentsMon, 07 Jul 2014 21:45:11 +0000http://www.enlighten.com/?p=2909The days of cover letters are coming to an end now that 77% of all recruiters are using social media to search out new talent, with 94% of them turning to LinkedIn. Luckily, you’ve separated your favorite drinking buddies Facebook and Twitter from your angelic persona on LinkedIn. Alas, you’ve successfully created two different identities of yourself for potential employers. Well done… or not. If you think LinkedIn is the only social network companies use to screen candidates, wise up kid. 69% of employers have rejected candidates based on their activity online, before even reviewing their [traditional] resume. Michael Page breaks down the top reasons you could be shooting yourself in the foot when it comes to landing your dream job:

That being said, it’s time to clean up your profile. And no, it doesn’t have to include decoding Facebook’s extremely vague privacy settings to change the permissions of who can see an overly-political rant you just had to get off your chest.

There’s good news though! A new Facebook and Twitter app called “Social Sweepster” combs through your social accounts and flags posts that could hinder your job search (like those photos from spring break your frat brothers tagged you in). Just connect your Twitter and Facebook accounts to begin a scan (the app can flag posts as early as 2005, so it could take over an hour). After the scan is completed, it will resurface some cringe-worthy content that could be the difference between finding a job and spending the rest of your 20’s living in your parents’ basement. Social Sweepster detects key words such as beer, pub, bar, shots, smoke and other foul language that would make your grandma blush.

It will then give you three options:

Delete the post on your profile directly from the app

Search Google to see if it appears somewhere else on the web

Give feedback; which will ultimately help the app determine other inappropriate material it should be looking for.

The Social Sweepster app is currently in beta, but you can sign up for free to get an invitation code. Until then, do yourself a favor and clean up your social channels, be more candid with your explicit thoughts and make the most out of your LinkedIn profile. It’s how I landed my current role here at Enlighten!